36% of Americans think 9/11 was an inside job. It wasn't, but if a President is going to bring up 9/11 as excuse for every expansion of his power or to continue a hugely unpopular while simultaneously stonewalling and withholding information you'll get these kinds of conspiracy theories.

That 36% is a larger chunk of the American people than the 29% who still support President Bush. Plus while that 29% mocks the 36% for conspiracy theories, the 29% will emphatically state that Iraq was behind 9/11; that WMDs were found in Iraq and moved to Syria but the liberal media won't report it; that God put dinosaur bones in the ground to test our faith; that Jesus turned the water into a nonalcoholic wine; that condoms break far more often than vows of chastity made at purity balls do; and that the sun revolves around the earth.

Fascinating post, Mark. Bet it doesn't change the mind of a single person who has "questions about what happened".

Rosie O"Donnell is just un-educated. She says stupid things just so that poeple talk about her, it is the only way she can stay in the limelight.

I know a person who was in Tower 7 and ran for his life. He heard the first plane, and watched the second. I know people who watched the plane fly into the Pentagon. And what about all those recorded phone conversations from the heroes of flight 11?

I believe that MS. O'Donnell has crossed the line from stupid to seditious. I don’t care anymore if she’s stupid or ignorant – she needs to be yanked from the air for doing harm. The fact that ABC is ignoring this speaks volumes about their standards.

When I heard that she was coming onto the View, I knew that I would not be watching it. Granted I work, so I am not home often to watch daytime tv, but trust me, when I am I avoid the View like I would the plague.

"The fact that ABC is ignoring this speaks volumes about their standards." Posted by: Kahn

ABC has standards???

Bravo, Popular Mechanics!

Kahn, I'm so glad that your friend survived Tower 7! Thank God!!

With so much Republican corruption and criminal behavior in the open, there is no need to entertian conspiracy theories.

This is what I ask anyone who believes in the 9/11 conspiracy hogwash:

The Bush Administration (using 'administration' very losely) cannot both be groosly incompetent and at the same time pull off such a masterful plot to bring down the towers.

In other words, Bush and company cannot be as stupid as they are and execute so ingenious a plan.

I choose incompetency and stupidity on this one. Bush rarely disapoints.

Wade

I had worked at the WTC for a while. I worked on the elevators. Those towers were in constant motion, sometimes when the wind was strong enough we had to slow the elevators down to keep the cables from hitting the sides of the hoistway.

Granted these building were designed to sway. My point being if they are swaying like that, up to 12 feet at the top, what kind of effect would that have on the entire structure with a plane hitting it as it did? There were a lot of forces generated in a lot of different directions in those towers. I have seen buildings that had fires in them have melted steel and aluminum components. This is not unusual when accellerants are used.

I knew some of the people killed in those towers. I knew some that got out. None of those who got out ever expressed a thought that this was other than it was.

Rosie is seriously mentally ill. Her twisted views on just about everything has her tilting at windmills. She thinks the worst of America because of her low self esteem, and she looks to drag down America in order to make herself feel like more than she is. A fat aging hag.

This kind of stuff cracks me up: "To even for a moment believe that anything other than two planes flown by terrorists did the damage, one has to be both amazingly ignorant as well as entirely hate-filled towards the United States of America."

How can someone make a statement like that? Read it again, it is hilarious. On what basis can you conclude, just by your own say-so, that someone who questions the official version of events must hate the USA? Do you completely miss the irony here? (Hint: it is YOU who comes off as being full of hate!)

Maybe not hate filed, how about totally ignorant and blinded by personal desires? That sounds cooler. :p

Anyway, ask any fireman out there about metal buildings and fires and they'll all tell you the same thing: Metal buildings act differently than wood buildings. For instance, you've all seen pictures of fire fighters venting the top of a building during a fire correct? Well you can bet that most likely that's a wood frame building because I know here in SoCal our fire fighters are told not to get on top of a metal frame building during a fire. The heat causes all sorts of stresses against the metal, especailly around the connections which can lead to a collapse.

Saying that heat has never brought down a building, or fire taking down steel, is just plain stupid.

Mark: "Normal People Vs Lunatics"

One certainly hopes that's what it boils down to. Perhaps the difference between you and I is that you assume all the lunatics are situated on the loony left, whereas I assume they are situated on both extremes. And if you don't see any lunatics on the right then, well...

Ricorun

Your statement is BS. It is only the loony left that is in denial of what happened that day. It is only the loony left that has turned its head against this great country. It is only the loony left that is in denial about thier own past. You blame bush for ruining relations with other countries, but you fail to recognize that had you done more during the 90's this may not have happened. Bush may not be popular but at least he is trying to do something to preserve the very freedoms you use to bash the country you live in.

What was Clintons tough time in office? Oh yeah, he got a blow job in the oval office. Well at least he did something with it...

Rosie should be committed to a mental institution for her rhetoric.

The most frightening aspect of this is that some people actually believe her, Sean Penn and the rest of the Charley Sheen types that make this stuff up.

There seems to be a blatant disregard for sanity with the kook left when it comes to 911 or the WOT, but when it comes to scandals such as Sandy Burglar stealing and destroying classified docs that would be an indictment of the Clintons, well that's another story now isn't it kooks.

If steel doesn't burn, doesn't have a problem with fire, then why is it part of the building code to cover all steel with flame retardant?

As to why would Rosie be viewed as hateful toward America... what else would you call it when she rejects video, rejects logic, and blames a sinister government plot instead that takes a tremendous leap of faith? Think of the unfathomable evil it would take to kill thousands of your citizens. Think of the unbelievable amount of people who would have had to be in on it, and there is no one coming forward to say this has any credibility. When we see the leaks that are done on a daily basis over even incorrect items, what are the chances that something as large as this would go unleaked.

Rosie has a cancerous hatred for what America is. She wants to change America into something other than what America has been, and yet she will hate the result of her efforts if it ever comes to pass.

Rosie's a kook. Are there any of our libbie posters here that would dispute that statement?

Goat, people like Rosie don't deserve a response. Their hatred for our President is their only driving force and if you or I were to place facts in front of her face, she'd discount them as "conservative lies". You know metal burns, I know metal burns ( I was in the forging industry 13 years ) and every sane person I know understands that metal burns. Could you imagine telling her that Titanium will burn when submerged in water??? She'd freak and her lips would splode!!

Thanks Rico,

We all knew you were the only sane one of your type! ;)

Mark,

Please don't lump us on the left with folks like Rosie. She (or her kind) does not speak for we on the left. Plain and simple. Metal burns, or I'm the King of Scotland.

It's like saying someone like Coulter or Malkin represents the mainstream conservative opinion.

I know conservatives aren't as ignorant as those two; so don't try to say liberals or Bush-detractors are headed by Rosie.

And navy;

Remember, while Berger's actions were ridiculous, they were also ineffective. He removed copies or classified docs. The DOJ even concluded that he only removed them to prepare himself for testimony, knowing full-well that the content still maintained its integrity in its original form. There was no effort to "erase" embarrassing information at all. He was under FBI observation whenever he went (approved by the White House might I remind you) into the archives; so it is laughable that this one man would be crafty (and cowboy) enough to subvert national secrets.

You should get your rhetorical facts straight before trying to pass-off a lie as evidence.

In citing these "reports" navy, you prove that it isn't we kook lefties who hold a monopoly on conspiracy theories...

Navydad: "We all knew you were the only sane one of your type!"

For the record, who would you consider a member of the kook right? Or are there any in your view?

Just for the record, I consider all those who believe what Rosie(and Charlie Sheen and his ilk) believes about the towers or even believe there is reasonable doubt about why they collapsed, to be shit-for-brains morons.

Ricorun,

Oh, there are kook rightists - Pat Buchanan often strays very close to kook right, for instance...on the other hand, our kooks are kept out of the pathways of power.

Take, for instance, Cindy Sheehan - she was in need of therapy, but what the kook left did was elevate her to anti-war spokesperson, even though her views on why we went into Iraq are in line with people who think that Mossad pulled of 9/11. People on the left can claim "O'Donnell doesn't represent me" till they are blue in the face...but she is of the left, and she's on a nationally broadcast television show, while kook rightists are relegated to obscurity.

Also, this sort of thing is destructive - it might seem something worthy of laughter, but no matter how absurd the conspiracy theory, if it is presented by anything seeming to have authority (and a television show, sadly, has authority in and of itself - but in O'Donnell's case it is even worse, because she appears alongside legitimate news people), people will believe it. Think of how long and baleful a career "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" has had - a transparant forgery of the Czarist secret police is used to this day as justification for killing Jews. It had apparant authority - people believed it, and keep on believing it.

There are fifty different legitimate reasons you can say it was bad to go into Iraq - but as soon as anyone strays into "war profiteering", "for oil", "for Haliburton", "for the Jews", you get into hateful destructiveness. And there are people on both the right and the left saying precisely that...but the people of the right are locked into the societal closet, the people on the left are front and center.

Anillo,

Coulter is of the regular right - a bomb-throwing polemicist of a high degree. She has said - and likely will say again - things which she shouldn't have said. On the other hand, there is a basis for her opinions - a basis in fact; for O'Donnell and all too many on the left, there is no basis in fact for their views, and yet they are rarely ever challenged.

I would say the Militia nuts of the 90's were kook rightists. They took all kinds of extreme views. Though I disagree with many of the gun restrictions, many of these people ignored them completely(kind of like Senator Webb). Many refused to pay taxes. Sadly, yes these people claimed to be right wing. Maybe they were Libertarian? Hard to tell. Tim McVeigh was of this crowd.

Who else? Any of the "right wing" extremeists who also believe in race supremacy. Are they really part of the right? I don't think so. For the record - I reject and revile the Nazi's, Aryan Brotherhood, KKK, and any similar group. Remember, for tens of decades, the KKK was largely a Democrat filled organization. I know its not anymore. But its not Republican either.

Note, I'm afraid that Farakans organization might be just as bad - but coming from the other side. The more I think about it, the race haters have a lot in common no matter what race they hate.

Is there still a violent "right to life" crowd? After the Atlanta bomber (can't remember his name), I'm not sure how big that group is. Psychologically, I think some of those people must be similar to the "eco-terrorists" who spike trees to injure loggers. I don't think the left enbraces that crowd any more than we embrace violence against abortion providers.

Kind of a ramble - sorry.

Hmm.. who is in the Kook right? A few gun toting survivalists I've met. Coulter can be close to that end, but she's just a pundit so she can go as far to kooksville as she wants. Pat B is pretty out there as well and I worry about him sometimes.

Other than that I can't really think of any really kooky righties. At least none that are well known or in positions of power. Feel free to toss out some you think might be.

I'm curious why people think Pat Buchanan is a kook (or near kook). Secondarily, why do people who think that way also think he's been kept out of the "pathways of power"? Considering his history, and how often he shows up on the TV screen and in print it seems to me a little hard to justify.

There are so many things I could pull to pieces here, so much scientific evidence that the planes could not have been the only factor in the collapse... but I'll leave that to scholarsfor911truth.org to explain - they're better qualified to explain the logistics, mechanics and physics than I am.

I still have to say WTC7's collapse is the oddest of all. The fires visible were tiny, and nowhere near the strength of the fires in either WTC1 or WTC2. Even if you believe fire alone brought down the other two buildings, there's still the fact that WTC7 collapsed into its own footprint without damaging any other buildings.

I've heard that there were tanks of diesel in WTC7. Well, fair enough, but ordinary diesel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel and it doesn't ignite very easily either.

I've also heard fanatical supporters say that WTC7 collapsed in part due to damage sustained from WTC1 and WTC2. Well, let's just look at the layout of the WTC a minute (courtesy of Wikipedia) - There's a large building, WTC6 right smack bang in between WTC7 and the other two buildings, so how could debris from WTC1 or 2 have hit 7? And doesn't that explanation more follow that WTC6 would also have collapsed, given that it must have sustained damage from both sides, WTC1/2 and WTC7 - and yet it stands, and was not even badly damaged.

Look, what she's saying here is that there's been a whitewash. That we've been lied to. That there's a LOT more to this than we're being told - and that's true. With contradictions, errors and omissions from the official report it's clear that we have never ever been told the whole story, and that's what we want - to be told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, not this pack of wholly implausible and scientifically impossible BS by politicians whose record on honesty is already more than dubious!

Ricorun,

Personally, I have seen't Buchanan on TV for a decade or more (other than glances - you know: not sitting there listening to him talk)...I know he's out there, but from my lack of seeing him, I can only figure he's become a "house conservative" for some MSM outfit.

His near kookiness comes in with his clear distaste for Israel (some think he's an anti-Semite, but I think that goes a bit too far...he's just an Arabist with a distaste for our alliance with Israel) as well as his penchant for isolationism and protectionism (sorry, but being an isolationist in the one power on earth which can preserve freedom is, well, weird).

Something happened to Pat along the way - and one Paddy to another, I pray he'll rethink his views or, at least, have a little faith in Our Lord to set things right, no matter how badly we screw it up.

Whisper,

Geesh! If you like, I'll delete your comment before everyone comes in an flames you...you do realise that WTC 6 was completely demolished and that it was a much shorter building than WTC 7?

9/11 was Bush's fault because he was too incompetent. His only goal from the beginning was to find an excuse to invade Iraq and take its oil and and grant no-bid cost plus contracts to his friends and then use the "capital" from being a war president to pass harmful domestic policies that only helped the rich and powerful.

Bush was warned that Osama was going to attack inside the U.S. The FBI told him that there appeared to be plans to crash a plane into a building. Richard Clark could not get Bush or any of his advisors into a meeting to discuss Osama until the day of or day befroe 9/11.

Worse case scenario is that Bush knew it was coming and let it happen, but I think it was just incompetence. The fact that he capitalized 9/11 so well to turn our democracy into a fascist state does give many the impression he had some part in it, especially when you learn that the Bin Laden family and the Bush family have been friends for three generations and that he let him get away in Tora Bora.

the 29% will emphatically state that Iraq was behind 9/11;

No, Jay, they don't. This myth was perpetrated by the left, after Bush said, "In a post 9/11 world, I wasn't going to sit idly by and allow a gathering threat to develop."

Now Jay, without making a complete fool of yourself, tell me how that statement means the President said Iraq was behind 9/11. I doubt you can, because you're a kool-aid guzzling, lobotomized parrot lemming. But give it a try, moron; it might be fun...

Rosie is seriously mentally ill. Her twisted views on just about everything has her tilting at windmills.

Yes she is, and she allows no refutation of her "points." The next day, she'll be off on some other kook topic. She gets a pass from the ArabicBroadcastingNetwork because she's a kook lib beyotch.

Mark, thanks for leaving WW's conspiracy post up. I pity the lad, so I'm not gonna bother flaming him at this time.

WW, might I suggest some inversion therapy? That's what Rosie does, when she's feeling depressed. It may work for you, too...

yeper it was George Bush that brought down the WTC's.

Not the two planes, traveling hundreds of mile per hour, loaded to the max with high-octane jet fuel that just happened to hit the 2 buildings right before Bush took them down..

How can us sheeple be so dumb to think those two planes killed 3000 people and destroyed the WTC

I still can't figure out how Bush knew that those planes would be taken over and have time for his 4000 people to lay explosives in both buildings before they hit.

What I find most interesting about this post is not that Rosie is a dingbat (Which I agree), but Mark's position that Ann Coulter is mainstream. I consider Rosie and Ann as mirror images of each other. Both are women who want attention so bad they will say anything.

Rico

I echo Mark's assessment of "right-wing" and believe that the Pat Buchanans and Ann Coulters of our party contribute fuel to the fire.

I also believe, after reading many of your posts over the past six months or so, that you are probably the only one on the left that posts here with any commomn sense...even though I disagree with most, I still detect common sense.

But when I read post from guys like Anillo, that claim that Sandy Burglar's incident had no impact on our national security...riiiggghht, and then complain about an outed so-called (and still un-verified) covert CIA agent, it becomes laughable.

Firstly Anillo, the DOJ refrained from any conclusion due to the undermining of evidence by the staff at the Library and that it became Burglar's word against their's...period.

Additionally, the Dirctor of the National Ahchives attempted to reveal the timelines and evidence that was cataloged over the time period Burglar admittedly STOLE these classified docs and then hid them ADMITTEDTLY under a trailer and ADMITTEDLY cut them up with scissors and then lied about the act to the DOJ.

And you kooks have the gall to complain about Scooter Libby!! What freakin hypocrites!

At this point Anillo, anything you say in regards to the Burglar incident will be considered liberal bias with absolutely NO credibility.

Try taking it to the Daily Hogs cause no one here will buy it.

BTW Anillo, if SB was only using the docs for study purposes, why jeopardize his career and not simply ask for the docs? Why hide them in his pants legs? OH, I know, SB is just a sloppy guy...right! It's BS and you and anyone that has knowledge of the Richard Clarke “after-action memo” knows that there was something in those docs that Slick Willy didn't want the American public to see.

But for you to say "There was no effort to "erase" embarrassing information at all" and that the FBI investigated him...BS, the FBI didn't commence the investigation until Oct. 2003, a month and a number of trips after he'd already violated national security. This is where you go to far Anillo, it is YOU that needs to research the info before you try to pull the wool over anyones eyes!

Whisperwolf needs help. Is that guy still offering free counseling for off the nut liberals down in Florida? I know there is a stigma attached to mental illness of the liberal kind, but man these people are nuts!

This is what we contend with - people who believe things which are not just false, but laughably false.

You mean like people who still cling desperately to the laughably false claim that we found WMDs in Iraq? Those people have about as much credibility as 9/11 conspiracy theorists, you know.

I love that you just called Coulter "mainstream," by the way. She makes the racial/homophobic slurs so you don't have to, eh Noonan?

I just watched the video at http://www.911revisited.com/video.html, where they try to make a case that explosives were used to demolish the WTC intentionally.

I am not convinced one way or the other, but the speakers in this film definitely do not come across as being "amazingly ignorant as well as entirely hate-filled towards the United States of America."

I suggest that you view the film with an open mind, and then ask yourself if the professors and scientists and firefighters and civil engineers and demolition experts appear "amazingly ignorant as well as entirely hate-filled towards the United States of America" as Mark suggests.

yekept,

If someone made a video asserting that explosives brought down WTC then they are, as I've said, amazingly ignorant and hate-filled towards the United States of America.

Look, this isn't the first time we've had kook theories about what happened - some people were asserting that FDR sent the fleet to Pearl Harbor because he knew it would be attacked and thus get us into war; some people still are asserting that a conspiracy killed JFK...it is kookery, plain and simple. There is not an iota of evidence that anything other than two jets hitting the buildings cause the damage to WTC on 9/11.

If you're going to have an "open mind", here in 2007, about what happened on 9/11 then you might as well open your mind to the possibility that pigs will fly.

CW,

Man, you've just gone all way into paranoia...seek help: you carry that around long enough, you'll have a stroke.

Sees,

Still just won't go look up the report from June of 2006 which detailed that we have found in Iraq, since 2003, 500 chemical munitions containing mustard and sarin gas; that many other such munitions are still believed to be in existence; and that the unaccounted for weapons likely contain mustard and sarin gas.

It really was in all the papers, Sees...and you make yourself more a fool every time you do this.

Too bad for us that more people are exposed the the foolishness of people like Rosie O' Donnell and other Liberal icons then are those who are exposed to or will seek to find the honest truth.

In short more people listened to O' Donnell say these things then will read what PM has to say.

So, just where in the buildings would you put the expolosives so that the people working there might not be alarmed? Just how much and what type explosive you think you're talking about? It's pretty stupid, the more you know.

So lefties, we named some. How about you? Can you name some left wing extremists? Or do you think they even exist? Is Rosie O extremist? Are the eco-terrorists extremists? Tell us - so we know how to take you.

No, Mark, you're rewriting history to suit yourself again. WTC6 didn't collapse. It was DAMAGED, quite badly, but it didn't collapse. Parts of it still stood and it CERTAINLY didn't freefall into it's own footprint.

There's a picture of what remained of it after parts of it were destroyed here and yes, it really was badly damaged, so badly it was condemned and had to be demolished - but despite the pounding it took from both sides, there was no freefalling into the building footprint.

I consider Rosie and Ann as mirror images of each other. Both are women who want attention so bad they will say anything.

How patently stupid--an uninformed, fat, comedienne with a big mouth, vs. a highly-intelligent, informed, individual who does tend to take her rhetoric to the extreme. Mirror image, Casper? Have you reregistered as an independent kook yet?

500 expired shells nobody even considers WMDs anymore--bravo, Noonan. Your ignorance finally comes front and center. Even the White House discounted that story, and George Bush himself has said we didn't find WMDs in Iraq. Why are you so determined to battle reality each and every day? You must know that you can't win. Do you really just plain old enjoy the ignorance (ignorance being bliss and all)? Do you think you'll get a bigger chunk of wingnut welfare for being such a loyalist to the point of denying reality? Do you think this is how one acts as a "good conservative"--clinging sadly to views that are the complete opposite of truth?

Not that I'm asking you to join reality, mind you. I've long given up that hope. Rather, it's people like you who push the wingnut elements of the right back to the margins where such ilk belongs, your credibility being the same as that of a 9/11 conspiracy theorist and all, so you should keep it up so that the adults can be in charge sooner.

I’m sorry… what school did Rosie get her engineering degree from – School of Ceramics (otherwise know as crackpots)?

Sooooo, there are no left wing extremists? Thanks. Says a lot.

Kahn: "Sooooo, there are no left wing extremists? Thanks. Says a lot."

Interesting, isn't it? Instead we get at least a couple of guys agreeing that the events of 9-11 were the result of some kind of grand conspiracy. Not JUST a grand conspiracy, but an inside job -- which apparently would have to include Osama himself. Maybe Osama cut a deal, huh? Yeah, right.

And that I think is how I would define a kook: someone who espouses (or supports) an argument that is so factually dishonest and/or so logically or morally incoherent that it enters delusion. IMO, those that qualify on the left include (but are not limited to) Michael Moore, Harry Belafonte, and Cindy Sheehan (although I tend to give her a pass; I think she's off the wall, but I feel for her grief). Those that qualify on the right include (but are not limited to) Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson and (this is going to be highly controversial, but I'll say it anyway...) Sean Hannity. Why Sean Hannity? Well, for one thing his facts are often so twisted as to be laughable. For another, he assumes that just about everything he doesn't agree with is part of some kind of grand, left wing delusion. Maybe he's just a party hack, but IMO, if you see that many delusions, then maybe you might want to consider the possibility that it's not them who are so afflicted. To me he's sort of the reverse Harry Belafonte. For that matter, Hillary Clinton comes pretty close with her "vast right wing conspiracy" meme.

And for the record, I don't consider Pat Buchanan a kook. He gets too dramatic in his conclusions sometimes, but I have always gotten the impression that he states the facts as he understands them honestly. And for those who think he's anti-Semitic, you have to explain his close association with and support for former Israeli PM Rabin.

navydad: "I also believe, after reading many of your posts over the past six months or so, that you are probably the only one on the left that posts here with any commomn sense...even though I disagree with most, I still detect common sense."

I try to base any opinion I espouse on common sense -- or, more specifically, on facts obtained as objectively as possible, and with logic applied as objectively as possible. In other words, I try to look at things from all sides. That doesn't mean I end up concluding that all sides are equally valid, but I start from that assumption. Often what spills out is a moderate point of view -- not always, but often. And it is that moderation that I think you mistake as "lefty". It's not just you though -- lots of people here do. Go figure.

I remember our first "discussion", when I said I felt Bush relied on a too small and too loyal a group of advisors. I don't remember the exact chronology, but around or since that time he has made a concerted effort to change that: he dumped Rumsfeld, Goss, Abizaid, and Casey, and kicked Pace upstairs. He brought in Gates, Hadley, Fallon, and Petraeus, respectively. He shifted Khalizad over to the UN and brought in Crocker. He's also changed control of the Iraq reconstruction efforts (but I forget their names). I don't know how closely you've been paying attention, but many of these guys had some rather unkind words about the way Bush was handling Iraq early on. These are not yes-men. Yet he brought them in to fill senior positions. And I think that is very much to Bush's credit. Likewise, it's obvious that his recent foreign policy bears more of Rice's fingerprints than Cheney's. I'm not a real big fan of Condi right now (I thought she folded on the Lebanon issue, but to be fair to her that was early on in her tenure), but things do seem to be looking up a little.

At any rate, at the time of our original contact I dumbed my argument down to suggesting that Bush relied too much on his "gut", and got a little carried away with that concept. And while I do believe that was a problem, other problems reinforced it. And I got the impression that he was so entrenched that I didn't think he could change. Well, I am happy to say that I was wrong. He did change, and the changes were significant. And thus, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But still, I am very much concerned that he waited too long. And both McCain and Graham two of his staunchest supporters (at least on Iraq), and who are in Iraq right now, feel the same way. If things don't continue looking up through August, I think you're going to see a significant erosion in GOP support for Bush's policy. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Then again the Dems may save me from my prediction by forcing a pull-out before then. But I doubt that too.

Rico,

You're mot alone in many of your assumptions regarding the way GW has handled certain issues, and I agree with you on some. But the one thing I'm certain of is that any leader typically surrounds himself/herself with people that know more about their jobs than the leader does, hence allowing them to perform their jobs in manner in which they are qualified. I also believe that IF, the MSM had not gone on an anti-Bush three year tyrade, that this war, quite possibly could have been over by now and with or without the WMDs, GW would go down in history as the Pres. with the biggest juevos. However, the golden temple incident followed by the MSM's incessant obsession to doom the Bush Admin. has stripped the lining from the American public's stomach. Especially when we see video of insurgent snipers killing our guys...it's sickening and makes me despise them all the more.

Over the past few years I've tried to find heart on the other side of the isle but it's been fruitless and spawns cause to defend our administration all the more, and now that I've had a son that was in the theater, not once, but twice, and a good friend that's had three (non-Kerryesk) purple hearts and Distinguished Service Cross, my loyalty for our CinC and our military has grown stronger and my opinion as to why we're there has become more solidified. My research goes deeper and my aspiration to uncover the truth grows just as strong as my loyalty.

In closing, regarding your thoughts on GOP erosion and the Dems...I feel the same.

Sorry to be so long-winded.

"highly-intelligent, informed, individual who does tend to take her rhetoric to the extreme"

Posted by: keefer at April 2, 2007 05:43 AM

Go back and research most of the garbage Anne Coulter vomits, keefer. She has been exposed in her ignorance, time & time again. If you consider her a highly-intelligent, informed individual then you truly disappoint me. I had hoped perhaps you had a little rational thought left, but I guess I was wrong.

The problem CO, is that you only hear what you want to hear from Ann and if you'd take off your liberal dunce hat and put your ear to the pavement, you'd hear reality coming your way. You can't continue to read between every line and be informed yourself.

BTW she is highly informed...but very intolerant.